yeah yeah yeah, leave the money making thread alone.Tarekith wrote:Can you guys both take this elsewhere, PM's or something? Would be nice to have one thread that didn't dissolve into this kind of thing.
you too could have sent PMs.
yeah yeah yeah, leave the money making thread alone.Tarekith wrote:Can you guys both take this elsewhere, PM's or something? Would be nice to have one thread that didn't dissolve into this kind of thing.
i don't mean any disrespect, not knowing your work, but as it has been mentioned a few times that this is an advertisement thread in a way:Tarekith wrote:- There's cheaper options now. In the past mastering meant about $1000 per CD to have done, and it still is that price (rightly so) at the larger mastering facilities. But lately there's certainly a lot more budget options available to people as well, some good, some bad true, but at least the playing field has opened up some. In the past it certainly didn't make sense for an artist to spend $1000 on a 500-1000 copy release where they might only see $400 in profit. Now there's other options out there.
No offense, I didn't see the thread again this morning when scanning the forums for new posts. Besides, I already stated in this one that IMO it's still about 50/50.Rave wrote:PMSL Tarekith said I should I change my poll in a thread I created about mastering and he didn't even have the courtesy to vote when I did hahaa
just name it mac vs. pc and you will have in no time the highest hit countRave wrote:yeah yeah yeah
GAFM ***95% of my business is still people doing the $40/track mastering, which I call demo mastering since it's mainly one off singles. The labels and individuals that use my services to prep CDs and submit DDPs to replication houses are generally doing larger runs of CDs, 5000+, so their investment in the project is already high. In situations like this, I'm the final Quality Assurance check, once it leaves my hands the client trusts that everything is 100% completely perfect on all fronts, which means I have to spend a LOT of time on the product. If it gets replicated with some type of error on my end, they don't get their replication money back, so they're paying me the added fee to make damn sure that doesn't happen. The extra cost goes into the QA aspects (as well as CD prep, PQ sheets, DDP checks, ISRC inserts, CD text, etc) more than the actual audio mastering, which is done more or less the same as the demo mastering.tamtam wrote:i don't mean any disrespect, not knowing your work, but as it has been mentioned a few times that this is an advertisement thread in a way:
Where do you see yourself in the picture you draw there?
Cause at first 1000$ sounds like big money, but then when I klick your sig link it says 80$/track no discounts for the non-demo-type mastering. Judging from the my CDs trackcount you're well above the larger mastering facilities' prices you mention, so rather part of the more expensive option rather than the cheaper options you menion?
Does that mean you're responsible for replication errors then? I mean financially? Cause in the non-music-jobs I know, money goes to the people with actual responsibility regarding money decisions.Tarekith wrote: If it gets replicated with some type of error on my end, they don't get their replication money back, so they're paying me the added fee to make damn sure that doesn't happen.